Retrospective Comparison of Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Versus Open Dismembered Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction

Purpose: We evaluated the clinical value of retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction compared with open surgery. Materials and Methods: The clinical data of 56 patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty were retrospectively compared with those of 40 patients who underwent open dismembered pyeloplasty through a retroperitoneal flank approach. The Student t test, Pearson chi-square test and Mann-Whitney rank sum test were applied for statistical analysis as appropriate. Results: Patient demographic data were similar between the 2 groups. In the laparoscopic group operative time (80 vs 120 minutes), estimated blood loss (10 vs 150 ml), recovery of intestinal function (1 vs 2 days), analgesic requirements (diclofenac sodium suppository) (75 vs 150 mg), incision length (3.5 vs 21 cm) and postoperative hospital stay (7 vs 9 days) were better than in the open group (p <0.001 for all). No intraoperative complications occurred in either group. The incidence of postoperative complications (2 of 56, 3.6% vs 3 of 40, 7.5%, p = 0.729) and success rates (55 of 56, 98.2% vs 39 of 40, 97.5%, p = 0.058) were equivalent in the 2 groups. Conclusions: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty is a minimally invasive, safe and effective therapy for ureteropelvic junction obstruction with low morbidity, shorter convalescence and excellent outcomes, and can be accomplished reasonably quickly in experienced hands.